While I'm all for sueing Sony, and digital games cost more than physical games sound wrong and shouldn't happen, I feel like they focus on the wrong thing to sue Sony for. Like someone mentions in this thread, this feels like sueing McDonalds for having a monopoly on Big Mac, and only sell Big Mac in their stores. I don't know what the alternative solution to this problem is, but this doesn't feel right to me. For me, I would rather focus on digital rights and access.

▲

Joel_Mckay 4 hours ago | parent [-]

It is not a new phenomena, and would be illegal in any other physical market. =3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)

▲

yuerino 4 hours ago | parent [-]

As a consumer, I agree that something feels wrong and should be illegal. I understand the intention of the case, but wrong execution, as in, what they're sueing for, is a tough case to win, and doesn't actually solve the problem, but maybe I'm just naive, and there's a precedent for this already in Netherlands or EU.

	▲	Joel_Mckay 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		HP was a great company, and released HP48 ROMs into community curated public license at the end of the product life-cycle. To this day I measure every company by that decision to support customers when the company moves on to bigger and better projects. For many years, Apple also had phenomenal customer support years after a sale. OS 7.5.3 could be installed decades after the product EOL. Sony DRM just became Tying with extra steps, as consumers now rarely own what they pay for... especially on upgrades. With the loss of physical media, proof of sale and preserved license terms are now ephemeral. =3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce)